The Industry being stubborn

[Reasonable]

MaxwellGT2000 said:

Reasonable said:

MaxwellGT2000 said:

Reasonable said:

MaxwellGT2000 said:

Carl2291 said:

routsounmanman said:

@Carl
When did Nintendo make a on-rails shooter and third parties just flooded the market with it?

Your point is moot, as a business you have to fund unexploited holes in the system's library and try to fill them, go to a spot where the competition is weak, or not present at all.

The Wii Remote has an IR pointer. It's perfect for On-Rails games.

Oh, and how about this.

Actually its perfect for third person shooters and first person shooters, Links Crossbow training wasn't all on rails it was also part TPS.  As for lightgun games, the IR is MUCH better than other options but still not lightgun precision, you can get pretty close when you have games like Ghost Squad that lets you calibrate it, but part of the fun of lightgun games were that you just point and shoot, you didn't need the pointer on screen and because the IR can be off depending on where you're standing/sitting in the room you can't just point and shoot naturally.

It's funny, and maybe due to how long I've played on PC (took me ages to get used to a gamepad for FPS) but I just can't use Wii controls for what I see as a normal, Half Life style FPS.  The nunchuck is great for movement, but holding the Wii mote and pointing just doesn't work for me like using a mouse, or even a gamepad.

What I'd love for FPS is a nunchuck / mouse combination.  That would be the best control option for FPS I think.  Precision movement with variable speed and rapid, precision movement both for small aiming adjustments or large scale swinging around.

There's advantages to all set up's, I've been told I'm a special case but for me FPS games on the Wii are as natural as FPS games on PC, but with the mouse it isn't about having a steady hand and wasd can be a fraction of a second faster.  On the other hand the Wii remote only requires you to move your wrist and can be much quicker as a result while the analog stick is like you said precise you can press a little to inch up you can press all the way to run. 

Personally I tell people to give it a chance, it's much more intuitive than using a gamepad for FPS games, but I chalk most of the "I hate FPS controls on Wii" to the same reason gamepad players say "I hate FPS controls on PC" it only makes sense if you either A suck or B didn't spend time to get down the controls.

Well, I will keep trying, but the challenge for the Wii is that, as you say, people like you seem to be in the minority for using the controls for certain genres.

I find the Wii acceptable for FPS but not superior, and I get the feeling I'm probably in the majority camp with that.  I'm talking here about people actually using the console, etc. not those simply not willing to try.

The other challenge the Wii faces is its specs.  At the end of the day, a lot of FPS players either are transitioning from PC across consoles (like me) or have got used to FPS on Xbox/360/PS3, and the Wii also looks pretty long in the tooth graphically for FPS games at this point in their lifecycle.

I don't think I'm a graphics whore as such, but when, for example, you've played  Half Life 2 on PC when Source was brand new, the Wii does seem limiting for what I expect for those titles.

In the end I feel that the Wii is very good at some stuff, which is why I have one, but that it will never get any broad acceptance across a bunch of popular genres, FPS (particularly online) among them.  As a result, with the huge jump in former PC centric genres like FPS on console, it simply cannot be the one console for all that the PS2 arguably came closet to (never being too hot for FPS and some genres either I wouldn't say PS2 100% covered all the bases).

Therefore the whole idea of why don't people settle on the Wii, or the 360 or the PS3 is a redundant one now.  The customer demographics for consoles are now fragmented this gen, across different consoles and by region too, and that's not going to chance I think.  The Wii will sell the most HW due to who it appeals to and their numbers, and by consequence will sell the most SW, but only of certain genres, with plenty of other genres being favoured elsewhere.

It's a bit of a bugger though as I've never had so much tech as this gen, what with a PC, Wii, PS3, DS and PSP and I still don't even have a 360.

Previously all I felt I needed was a PC and a PS2.

I was meaning I'm a special case at how good I am, which is true, but I still have friends that play their FPS games on 360 and PS3, I brought over CoD4 Wii and the only thing they had issues with was holding their writsts steady.  It has a lot with relearning how you play, lots of console FPS players like to move their hands around while playing, PC players do that less but they still can, with the Wii extra movement can get you killed.

As for the fragmented bases, it's really just making games that appeal to those groups and where you put them, gamers follow good games as you've just proven, you thought PC and PS2 was all that was needed and now you have a Wii, PC, PSP, PS3, and DS, if a company started to just back Wii you'd buy the games there.  To have a market to sell to on a console you gotta give the players a reason to go there.

My point is the Wii launched without the necessary specifications / online to support the level of FPS sales seen on 360/PS3 and PC formerly.

It's not just about the game but the associated technical level of the games.  The Wii, much as I love my Wii, just doesn't have the horespower to support what I and clearly the majority of gamers who like FPS/TPS type titles hold as the standard.  It's just not going to happen.  The Wii is great for Wii Sports, etc. Mario and the like but it's not going to support the likes of Assassin's Creed, Bioshock, Uncharted 2, etc. because a key element of those titles is how they look and in some cases the open world they support, and the Wii doesn't have enough power to support them to what is the perceived acceptable level technically.

So the market is fragmented and unchangeably so.  The Wii will support sales of 10M plus for certain titles, and the 360/PS3 are going to support 10M plus sales of other titles, and that isn't going to cross over or change this gen due to the different technical capabilities of the platforms.  That's really my point.  No matter how good an FPS hits the Wii it's never going to affect the set demographic split that now exists.  And to be honest, I'm pretty condifent that the Wii is very unlikely to ever see a superlative FPS that hasn't already been a bigger hit elsewhere.

Heck, for someone like me the Wii is like 10 years out of date for an FPS (although as a PC gamer technically for me the 360 and PS3 are out of date, too).

I'm not really talking about individual titles though, just the major demarcations between the consoles in reference to elements of this post, which is about third party support for the Wii and why in feels like it's not getting the support you'd expect for its install base.  The Wii is going to get haphazard support due to the huge difference in tech specs, the strength of Nintendo's own titles vs third parties, the difference of its controls and the fact that there a certain genres it is by far the weakest install base for which nonetheless are very lucrative genres currently, particularly FPS/TPS such as CoD, Gears, Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, etc.